So the Scry Lands/Temples have been out for a while now and have been a big hit. Scry is a "deciduous" mechanic that'll be back often, which reminds me of another mechanic we're likely to see again: cycling.
Cycling is a great mechanic, and we've seen it used on lands before to decent effect, but only ever on mono colored lands. It seems plausible that we'll eventually see this taken to the next logical step:
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T: Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
So here are my questions:
- What should the cycling costs of these lands be?
- How would these lands affect Standard & Modern, either positively or negatively.
- Is there a different (but still elegant) design for a cycling land that could be favored more towards aggressive decks? (which is a common dual land issue when the standard drawback is entering tapped)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Here's my suggestion for alternative comes into play untapped version and cycling cost. Clearly the below version is OP though, so CD for cycling cost I think is reasonable.
Cyclone Shore
Land (R) t: Add 1 to your mana pool.
As long as CARDNAME is in your graveyard, lands you control have "T: Add W or U to your mana pool."
Cycling WU
Given that riftstone portal is a perfectly competitive card, that has to have a bigger drawback than just a cycling cost. Simply raising cycling cost won't cut it.
- What should the cycling costs of these lands be?
Greater than 2.
How would these lands affect Standard & Modern, either positively or negatively.
In a vacuum, not much. Toss in other cycling gimmicks, on the other hand...
Is there a different (but still elegant) design for a cycling land that could be favored more towards aggressive decks? (which is a common dual land issue when the standard drawback is entering tapped)
While not a dual, I always thought Blasted Landscape was good (at least for casual) for mono-color aggro decks that don't need many lands or were not very color intensive, but I could be wrong.
Did any of the mono-color cycling lands see play when they were in standard? They can't be particularly powerful as I don't see them run all that often in EDH. ETBT is a really big drawback. Also, almost all cycling lands before this have been commons, so I think we can just go with...
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
...Ya, its strictly better than one of the cycling land cycles, but who cares. That cycle was common, and not particularly powerful. Of course, you could always take these cycling lands in a different direction. Increase the cycling cost and add cycling triggers to taste. It could be a very cool cycle.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
Did any of the mono-color cycling lands see play when they were in standard?
Some did, but only as additional triggers for either Astral Slide or Lightning Rift decks. Generally your power assessment of them is correct, but specific cards can warp their usefulness.
Did any of the mono-color cycling lands see play when they were in standard? They can't be particularly powerful as I don't see them run all that often in EDH. ETBT is a really big drawback. Also, almost all cycling lands before this have been commons, so I think we can just go with...
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
...Ya, its strictly better than one of the cycling land cycles, but who cares. That cycle was common, and not particularly powerful. Of course, you could always take these cycling lands in a different direction. Increase the cycling cost and add cycling triggers to taste. It could be a very cool cycle.
I like this idea. I agree with harlannowick about the Cycling cost. I think these would be proper at Uncommon. They'd make for a disappointing cycle of rares. Cycling isn't exactly the "next level" of Scrying in terms of power because the Scry lands Scry for free and you still have the land. There's no comparison except for perhaps in niche situations.
I think "cycling WU" and uncommon. Doing hybrid-cost cycling would allow a monocolored deck to run eight of them (assuming only an allied-color cycle).
I think "cycling WU" and uncommon. Doing hybrid-cost cycling would allow a monocolored deck to run eight of them (assuming only an allied-color cycle).
I agree that they should be a lower rarity. Cycling is a pretty dry draw-fixing mechanic, and I don't think it has a place at rare unless it's doing something fancy like the Decree cycle. They could probably even be costed 2 at uncommon. The Onslaught cycling lands are actually really good, but the Urza's Saga ones are decidedly less so (well, without Fluctuator). With cycling WU, you might even be able to get away with making them commons in a multicolor set.
I think "cycling WU" and uncommon. Doing hybrid-cost cycling would allow a monocolored deck to run eight of them (assuming only an allied-color cycle).
This is exactly how I had set these up when I designed them for a custom set.
They are considerably weaker than Temples, but remain on at least the lower fringes of Standard worthiness (probably comparable to the common KTK lands in power; you don't feel dirty playing them but you aren't overly happy about them).
In Limited they are quite good.
I like the way they fix your mana when it isn't fixed, and go away once your mana is fixed.
It's interesting to see most people putting these at uncommon, mostly because this is exactly what happened when the temples came out; everyone thought they were uncommon level cards until they actually played with them, and now they're a key part of standard and seeing fringe modern play. I'm not saying these couldn't be costed as uncommons, most things could, but I'd be surprised if they weren't pushed up to rare quality to be more relevant in constructed. Granted, this could depend on whether or not you agree with the policy of making lands rare in the first place.
I'm also surprised that people are saying cycling is weak and/or boring. Yeah maybe it's not flashy, but neither are most of the popular dual land designs in recent memory (the temples, the SOM fast lands, the check lands etc.) The only recent rare dual lands that do more than that are the Worldwake man lands. It again sounds very similar to the reaction to the scry lands, only I'd expect cycling lands to be even more potent given their potential interactions with delve, dredge, miracles, etc.
Again, we could obviously give them ridiculous costs of 1 or something and they'd be instantly playable, and I don't think every dual land cycle should break modern open. I'm just surprised that most people's instinct with these is to have them be fringe uncommons rather than staple rares.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Granted, this could depend on whether or not you agree with the policy of making lands rare in the first place.
That might be be part of it for me. I like to push lands to lower rarities when it can gotten away with. We have seen enough Coastal Tower+ at uncommon, and a few even at common, that this seems like it should fit at uncommon okay.
Going with more color intensive costs seems to be the way that WotC makes these kinds of cards so you have to be fully in the colors to get the extra benefit. For example: Azorius Cluestone and Abzan Banner.
Cyclone Shore
Land (R) t: Add 1 to your mana pool.
As long as CARDNAME is in your graveyard, lands you control named Cyclone Shore have "T: Add W or U to your mana pool."
Cycling (W/U)
I still think harlannowick's idea is best for a rare cycle.
Piar has a good point, but then, there's over 150 1cmc cantrips (including a cycle of Cycling lands), so I don't think 1cmc cycling is out of the question.
Lord's idea is mechanically flavorful and novel. Would be a perfect uncommon cycle.
Lands with Cycling C already exist but don't get played whatsoever. There's also plenty of landcycling cards like Pale Recluse that likewise see no play. Make the cycling cost WU and they'll be virtually unplayable in standard constructed/limited and drink coasters after they cycle out. Fine if that's the goal, but I thought this was a proposal to make (rare quality) standard/modern constructed playable duals.
Ok, delving back into this for a moment, here are some alternative designs for different rarities...
Cycling Shore
Land (C)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling WU
Cycling Shore
Land (u/R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling [Cost]
When you cycle Cycling Shore, [WU Effect].
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
I say go for the simplest, most straightforward version. To ensure the cycle isn't strictly better than cycle lands of the past, the cycling costs are more color restrictive than the Drifting Meadow cycle and cost more than the Secluded Steppe cycle. Perfect common duals!
Serene Shore
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(W/U)
Gloomy Shallows
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(U/B)
Infernal Cavern
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(B/R)
Untamed Wilds
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(R/G)
Quiet Verge
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(G/W)
Austere Wastes
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(W/B)
Stormy Cove
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(U/R)
Putrid Mire
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(B/G)
Rough Terrace
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(R/W)
Mysterious Spring
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(G/U)
When Cycling returns, especially in an Alara block, I'd like to see lands like these. They would have been perfect for Shards block, though putting them in the first set would have been difficult unless they used two art variants for the ally duals. Conflux would have been a much easier set in which to introduce them but as a small set would not have been ideal for providing color fixing for the whole block. Alara Reborn would have been right out thanks to the "all gold" theme.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Cycling is a great mechanic, and we've seen it used on lands before to decent effect, but only ever on mono colored lands. It seems plausible that we'll eventually see this taken to the next logical step:
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
So here are my questions:
- What should the cycling costs of these lands be?
- How would these lands affect Standard & Modern, either positively or negatively.
- Is there a different (but still elegant) design for a cycling land that could be favored more towards aggressive decks? (which is a common dual land issue when the standard drawback is entering tapped)
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Cyclone Shore
Land (R)
t: Add 1 to your mana pool.
As long as CARDNAME is in your graveyard, lands you control have "T: Add W or U to your mana pool."
Cycling WU
Avalon: The Legend Begins :: Pirate Set :: Babel: The Æther Wars
Favorite Magic Card: Fowl Play
[Primer] [Barrin's Tome]: A Master Wizard's Spellbook.
Greater than 2.
In a vacuum, not much. Toss in other cycling gimmicks, on the other hand...
Damage when ETB or cycled?
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=4557651&postcount=1
TheWarden's Creative Commons Music Pick Project (Retired):
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=336498
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
...Ya, its strictly better than one of the cycling land cycles, but who cares. That cycle was common, and not particularly powerful. Of course, you could always take these cycling lands in a different direction. Increase the cycling cost and add cycling triggers to taste. It could be a very cool cycle.
- Manite
Not in Standard, but in Extended Life from the Loam and cycling lands (plus Seismic Assault) was a thing.
I like this idea. I agree with harlannowick about the Cycling cost. I think these would be proper at Uncommon. They'd make for a disappointing cycle of rares. Cycling isn't exactly the "next level" of Scrying in terms of power because the Scry lands Scry for free and you still have the land. There's no comparison except for perhaps in niche situations.
I agree that they should be a lower rarity. Cycling is a pretty dry draw-fixing mechanic, and I don't think it has a place at rare unless it's doing something fancy like the Decree cycle. They could probably even be costed 2 at uncommon. The Onslaught cycling lands are actually really good, but the Urza's Saga ones are decidedly less so (well, without Fluctuator). With cycling WU, you might even be able to get away with making them commons in a multicolor set.
This is exactly how I had set these up when I designed them for a custom set.
They are considerably weaker than Temples, but remain on at least the lower fringes of Standard worthiness (probably comparable to the common KTK lands in power; you don't feel dirty playing them but you aren't overly happy about them).
In Limited they are quite good.
I like the way they fix your mana when it isn't fixed, and go away once your mana is fixed.
I'm also surprised that people are saying cycling is weak and/or boring. Yeah maybe it's not flashy, but neither are most of the popular dual land designs in recent memory (the temples, the SOM fast lands, the check lands etc.) The only recent rare dual lands that do more than that are the Worldwake man lands. It again sounds very similar to the reaction to the scry lands, only I'd expect cycling lands to be even more potent given their potential interactions with delve, dredge, miracles, etc.
Again, we could obviously give them ridiculous costs of 1 or something and they'd be instantly playable, and I don't think every dual land cycle should break modern open. I'm just surprised that most people's instinct with these is to have them be fringe uncommons rather than staple rares.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
That might be be part of it for me. I like to push lands to lower rarities when it can gotten away with. We have seen enough Coastal Tower+ at uncommon, and a few even at common, that this seems like it should fit at uncommon okay.
Going with more color intensive costs seems to be the way that WotC makes these kinds of cards so you have to be fully in the colors to get the extra benefit. For example: Azorius Cluestone and Abzan Banner.
Cyclone Shore
Land (R)
t: Add 1 to your mana pool.
As long as CARDNAME is in your graveyard, lands you control named Cyclone Shore have "T: Add W or U to your mana pool."
Cycling (W/U)
Avalon: The Legend Begins :: Pirate Set :: Babel: The Æther Wars
Favorite Magic Card: Fowl Play
[Primer] [Barrin's Tome]: A Master Wizard's Spellbook.
cycling 2
When you cycle, add U or W to your mana pool.
........................
Piar has a good point, but then, there's over 150 1cmc cantrips (including a cycle of Cycling lands), so I don't think 1cmc cycling is out of the question.
Lord's idea is mechanically flavorful and novel. Would be a perfect uncommon cycle.
Lands with Cycling C already exist but don't get played whatsoever. There's also plenty of landcycling cards like Pale Recluse that likewise see no play. Make the cycling cost WU and they'll be virtually unplayable in standard constructed/limited and drink coasters after they cycle out. Fine if that's the goal, but I thought this was a proposal to make (rare quality) standard/modern constructed playable duals.
Cycling Shore
Land (C)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling WU
Cycling Shore
Land (u/R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling
Cycling Shore
Land (R)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T : Add W or U to your mana pool.
Cycling [Cost]
When you cycle Cycling Shore, [WU Effect].
- Manite
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(W/U)
Gloomy Shallows
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(U/B)
Infernal Cavern
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(B/R)
Untamed Wilds
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(R/G)
Quiet Verge
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(G/W)
Austere Wastes
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(W/B)
Stormy Cove
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(U/R)
Putrid Mire
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(B/G)
Rough Terrace
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(R/W)
Mysterious Spring
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add or to your mana pool.
Cycling 1(G/U)
When Cycling returns, especially in an Alara block, I'd like to see lands like these. They would have been perfect for Shards block, though putting them in the first set would have been difficult unless they used two art variants for the ally duals. Conflux would have been a much easier set in which to introduce them but as a small set would not have been ideal for providing color fixing for the whole block. Alara Reborn would have been right out thanks to the "all gold" theme.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.